RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Some comments/questions for our call

["Tijani BEN JEMAA" <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi Elaine,

 

The continuity cost should be addressed; as Eric implies several comments on
DAG4 were posted on this issue.  Clearly defining the expectations and
lowering the burden is necessary for all applicants- I believe that is why
we did not specifically call out this particular barrier for only the
disadvantaged applicants. 

 

Yes Elaine, but it’s more critical for disadvantaged applicants and needs to
be addressed by our Working Group

 

------------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Executive Director 

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations

Phone : + 216 70 825 231

Mobile : + 216 98 330 114

Fax     : + 216 70 825 231

------------------------------------------------------------------

 

  _____  

De : owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx] De la part de Elaine Pruis
Envoyé : lundi 2 août 2010 23:06
À : Eric Brunner-Williams
Cc : Andrew Mack; Gisella Gruber-White; SOAC-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx;
ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Objet : Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Some comments/questions for our call 

 

The continuity cost should be addressed; as Eric implies several comments on
DAG4 were posted on this issue.  Clearly defining the expectations and
lowering the burden is necessary for all applicants- I believe that is why
we did not specifically call out this particular barrier for only the
disadvantaged applicants.


 

Elaine

 


On Aug 2, 2010, at 11:24 AM, Eric Brunner-Williams
<ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


There was another area of unstated cost to the applicant, the three years
continuity of operations funding requirement.

I commented on the issue to the DAGv4 comments [1] but in a nutshell, for
each 1k of registrants, on the order of 10 or fewer transactions against the
SRS is an estimate of "load" when a registry has ceased operations and is
just
servicing renewals and other ancilliary traffic. The requirement to for the
SRS to be capable of continuity operations with a density of one complete
database transaction per minute is a registration base the size of the .cat
registry at present, or about 40k registrants.

Therefore the upper bound on contunity cost for registries which convert to
continuity operations having fewer than 10^^6 registrations is ICANN's own
annual per-registry oversight labor staffing, now on the order of USD
25k/yr,
with negligible platform cost.

I think putting a number on continuity is important, particularly where the
"fails at" expectation for the revenue an expense projections of applicant
operators is consistent with linguistic and cultural communities lacking
state support.

I only mention this because in reading the 1 & 2 papers I'd not come across
a treatment of the continuity cost as an undefined risk to applicants.

Eric



[1]  <http://forum.icann.org/lists/4gtld-base/msg00007.html>
http://forum.icann.org/lists/4gtld-base/msg00007.html

Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 9.0.851 / Base de données virale: 271.1.1/3044 - Date: 08/01/10
19:40:00